Range (by) David Epstein

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.  

F. Scott Fitzgerald 

Took up this book called "Range: Why generalists triumph in a specialized world" by David Epstein. With the diet of Gladwell (10 k hours rule), I am used to the Talent is overrated notion and so this book was a "binary jolt". I reasonably believed, you should get to the stadium as early as you can and practice, get closer and closer to "pole position" and give your best shot to be successful (pick-n-stick approach).

While that approach tells you that earlier you start the better, suddenly, you come across a proposition which is orthogonal, making it difficult to digest. Eventually got over it and I think he has some germane points to make his side of the case.

Of course, I did have a modicum of reservation about the early start approach, since if it was that straightforward, almost everyone would have followed suit. Such a mild side eyed doubt helps you to keep the balance. Another interesting thing is that, Gladwell himself has a comment about this book saying "being told that everything I thought about something was wrong".

He like Gladwell,refers with the same Tiger Woods (as an example to start very early with a laser focus) and next he takes Roger Federer who experimented with several  ball games before he settled on Tennis.

You can appreciate the examples because it is almost contemporary (not from History books) and establishes the context for full "range". 

He takes up some fascinating and compelling stories where sticking to the expertise did backfire or even fatal as in the case of Montana fire accident where the fire fighters refused to give up their tools and ends up dying.He also talks about Para jumpers' episode - where thinking on the usual lines would not have yielded such a decision. In order to save space for the injured soldiers and emergency medical supplies, the key person makes the most important decision of his life - to stay back and guide the team rather than going with them. They were always trained as a super close knit team, the very idea is unbelievable and unthinkable. But in the end, mission worked out well. The captain would later remark "If something bad happens and if the officer is not there, think of explaining to 10 families" - a shuddering thought even as a reader.

He takes NASA challenger disaster in detail in order to explain how the culture "In God we trust, all others bring data" did not help. He explains well how to balance the risks that two extremes generate: That is, "mindless conformity" and "reckless deviation". He quotes Richard Feynman when he investigated the challenger disaster "When you don't have data, you have to use reason".

Author gives many data points and anecdotal evidence to support the fact that experts are no better forecasters than normal people. He adds a neat corollary that "Good forecasters are good belief updater. If they make a bet and lose, they embrace the logic of loss just as they embrace the reinforcement of win". When there is a dearth of data, he suggests "sense making" rather than decision making. He says, if I take a decision, will take pride in it and defend it whereas if I try to make sense, it would entail listening to others and goes on to say "Hunches to be held lightly". This is akin to futurist Paul Saffo's remark on forecasting "Strong views held lightly".

Our personalities change over time. Specializing too early has its disadvantages since THAT person has not yet arrived. Most of the significant changes occur during the ages 18-20 and then in late 20's. His repeat point is, when a specialist encounters novel or unfamiliar situations, they would not consider eschewing their experience entirely which usually result in a disaster (but I wonder how many times when you play chess Queen sacrifice for example is required and that too at a tournament level to win the game). He quips that, patient has more chances of living when cardiologists caucus because common treatments with dubious effects are less likely to be performed - apparently there is enough data to support this claim.

In his book Frames-of-mind, Howard Garder observes, "If a particular behavior is considered important by culture, nearly every normal individual would attain impressive level of competence". All of us can cite many examples to support this conclusion - for example, now a days, being plain mobile phone user just to make calls to mobile savvy like using exotic apps in the mobile phone. In this era of super-heated competition, starting early resonates with society more than broad brush and later deep dive - except that one will be unprepared for unexpected turns.

In systems theory, one of the key maxims on the risk side is: "Aggregation gives protection against UNKNOWN. Specialization gives protection against KNOWN". But then, wisdom lies in acceptance of this mutual spectrum.

We have to take a pick between Unknown and Known - all the best. 

Thanks for reading this far.

regards,

madhu

Connecting the Dots: Leadership Lessons in a Startup World (by) John Chambers with Diane Brady

“In human affairs of danger and delicacy successful conclusion is sharply limited by hurry. So often men trip by being in a rush. If one were properly to perform a difficult and subtle act, he should first inspect the end to be achieved and then, once he had accepted the end as desirable, he should forget it completely and concentrate solely on the means. By this method he would not be moved to false action by anxiety or hurry or fear. Very few people learn this.” - John Steinbeck, Nobel Prize, 1962.

John Chambers has given the business equivalent of that thought. “Write the press release for the results you want before your start the project.” He then goes on to stress how maniacal focus to execution is the key to success.

His sound bites or distilled wisdom are striking. Some of them here:

1. Dream big: Be bold again and again.
2. You compete against market transitions – not against competition.
3. Better to stumble first than arrive last.
4. In any setback, determine how much is self-inflicted and how much is market driven. If it is mostly the latter, don’t alter the strategy too much. (To me, it is one of the clearest recommendations. Easy-to-understand but hard to implement.)
5. Sell people only what they really need.
6. Move on when the outcome can no longer be achieved.
7. My favorite: Worst mistake you can do is to do the right thing for too long.

He adduces each point with at least one convincing example. The thought momentum he progressively builds is unmistakable.

Author’s proclivity for West Virginia area is clear but is not surprising. Wherever you have spent the childhood, one has a deep emotive connection.

Author enlists 7 attributes that he looks for in a leader. He has made the job very easy for recruitment agencies.

One interesting counter-intuitive point he makes while recalling Cisco<>Huawei lawsuit. Key is to focus on what the other player is likely to do – and not what you would do in that situation – understand the other side’s mindset is the main message.

Cisco has mastered the art-n-science of acquisitions. His narrative on this is a very compelling read.

He has great sense of humor. When a meeting is over, mentally summarize before you head to the next. For that take small break. To make that point he quotes a quip from one of his friends: “Never pass up a bath room on your way to meeting. It becomes even more important as you grow older”.

His meeting anecdotes with Henry Kissinger, Shimon Peres and other stalwarts are very interesting to read. Also, his comparisons between India and France was the one I enjoyed the most.

Book’s Chapter 11 is about Entrepreneurship and that has 13 Questions. While it is one of the best chapters, it is clear John does not believe in numerology 😊.

They say, Pearl is Oyster’s biography. Connecting the dots should you consider it as a nuanced biography, you can walk a with a couple pearls for sure.

Thanks for reading this far.

Regards,

madhu 

Originals by Adam Grant

Adam Grant is one of the popular writers of our time. In this book, he focuses on Originals who are some kind of non-conformists (perhaps from the stand point of widely accepted world views) that are changing the world.

Incredibly, he dedicates one full chapter in this book to Procrastination. He claims that this commonly hated vice is useful when it comes to the question of creativity albeit it is a sworn enemy of productivity. Actually, I did follow the prescription by delaying this post for more than a quarter :-).

He is a master in introducing terms which are relatively unused in interesting ways, for example,Vujade (opposite of Dejavu) which means look at the familiar situation in a new light and so on.

The points he adduces are also equally compelling. Couple of examples.

1.  When parents encourage their children to develop strong values, they effectively limit their influence:  When Winstead went public with her rebellion political views, her father quipped: "I messed it up. I raised you to have an opinion and I forgot to tell you that, it was supposed to be mine!".

2. "Appeal to the Character rather than behavior”. For example, instead of saying "Please don't cheat" say, “Please don't be a cheater". When the emphasis shifts from behavior to character, people evaluate their choices differently. Instead of asking if the behavior will achieve the results they want, they take the action because that is the right thing to do. It is like if somebody is drowning, you don't ask which god but tend to just jump and save.

He cites, more diversified the exposure, greater the chance of better idea(s) selection in future. Gives examples of Edison, Galileo kind of luminaries - chronologically , they are far too much in the rear view mirror to be germane for us, yet I will take the examples with more than a pinch of salt. I personally think we are in "deep dive" era where occasionally lateral exposures would come handy and perhaps make a good story. 

Interestingly, he gives examples of how artistic hobby and correlates to of winning  Nobel Prize. Music (2x), Drawing, Painting (7x), Modelling, Mechanics (12x), Performing arts, Magic (22x). For example, someone who is practicing magic is 22 times more likely to win the Nobel assuming he/she also focused on the main job!

Sure enough, no management book can escape one matrix (usually 2x2). Here, he discusses four options (1) Exit (2) Voice (3) Neglect (4) Persistence based on change/maintain the situation (Vector-1) and Beneficial/Detrimental to the organization (Vector-2). The discussions thereof are very good.

In the long run, we always regret the errors of omission rather than commission. If we were to run our lives again, he strongly feels we would censor less. I tend to agree with him on opportunities but not sure about people interactions or let us say spirituality - anyway, we get the message.

This book with all the wonderful snippets, gives us a good approximation of the ORIGINALS and how they are only subtly different from the rest - not vastly different. It is a warm and comfy feeling.

Scot Adams famously said, "Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes - Art is knowing which ones to keep". So, with many examples, you need to artistically navigate to decide which ones to keep.

Thanks for reading this far.

regards,

madhu

Ref:

1. TED Talks by Adam Grant.

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vuja_De

Throwing rocks at the GOOGLE bus by Douglas Rushkoff

When you read a book, sometimes you get the feeling of dejavu – a feeling that we have already seen or gone through it before. But how about reading a book that gives a feeling that is orthogonal to it – I mean vujade? That is, we have never seen this familiar thing in that light feeling.

This is my first book by Doug albeit he seems to be a prolific writer and has been writing for quite some time and I am impressed. 

(FYI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Rushkoff)

Doug is a worried man like many of us about the direction in which the world is moving. He discusses the unequal distribution of wealth, and technologies like robots, AI, and algorithms moving rapidly to replace millions of jobs without much societal deliberation about the resulting consequences. He presents his thoughts on how they can be optimized to help the society as a whole instead of blindly running with the changes to wherever they take us. He might not give solutions for everything, but he does point out many potential pitfalls.

Key ideas that got my attention (by no means exhaustive).

1.  Concentration of wealth is not self-correcting.

2.  One has design for the velocity of business instead of focusing on growth - to quote him, Money is a verb not a noun. Don’t hoard keep it circulation.

3.   Growth cannot be an end by itself. He gives “twitter” as an example.

4.    Technology does take away jobs and the next generation jobs are less than previous one in terms of number and usually involves less skill and prone to commoditization.

5.    Most of us are in “extractive” business rather than generative and circulatory business which alone is sustainable over long run. This may sound forbiddingly abstract but will be clear when you read the book.

6.    Alternatives to charted business corporations models like Benefit corporations, Flexible purpose corporations are well explained with examples.

7.    Corporations did not emerge – they were invented and hence there is a scope for re-inventing them in order to restore the power of middle class. His focus is on distributed prosperity.

8.    His views on social media is very refreshing. (He gives examples in music and host of other industries.)

9.    He has brilliantly applied Marshall McLuhan classic litmus test questions on media

a.      What does the medium enhance or amplify?

b.      What does the medium make obsolete?

c.       What does the medium flip into when pushed to extreme?

He takes Automotive and Cellphone as examples – and I am convinced by his explanations.

10.  He highlights the benefits of local currencies and importance of thriving local economies.

Now coming back to his Twitter: It was successful, but it is not successful enough to justify the money investors have pumped in. Already it had good revenues, happy employees, users were well served, but it may never grow enough to win back 100 times the initial $20Billion bet. To do that, it has to grow bigger and faster than the economy of many nations! Isn’t that a bit too much to ask of an app that sends out messages of 140 characters or less?

He says that there is a disproportionate relationship between capital and value.

He points out that for some of the products prices may be low – but costs (he means social to a large extent) are high. Receptionist being replaced by answering machines, managers getting replaced by algorithms, workers being replaced by robots etc. His examples are really striking and poignant.

In any case, I am going to read more of his works.

Thanks for reading this far.

Regards,

Madhu

PS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_bus_protests

My Linked-IN 2016 Posts

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/morphing-delivery-compliance-consultation-madhu-parthasarathy?trk=mp-author-card

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/contacts-portability-madhu-parthasarathy?trk=mp-author-card

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/team-building-queen-bee-effect-madhu-parthasarathy?trk=mp-author-card

My LinkedIn Year-2015 Posts.

Hello Readers:

Year 2015, I did not post any. But I did write on LinkedIN. They are not book reviews, but some of my views on something specific I have experienced in my career.

I have given the links of the four posts I have made last year.

Design Debt:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/design-debt-from-eugene-euthanasia-madhu-parthasarathy?trk=pulse_spock-articles

Design Alternatives:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/design-alternatives-madhu-parthasarathy?trk=mp-author-card

Prototyping Scenarios

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/prototyping-scenarios-madhu-parthasarathy?trk=mp-author-card

TT Quotient (Trust and Transparency Quotient)

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tt-quotient-madhu-parthasarathy?trk=mp-author-card

As always comments are welcome. Thanks for taking efforts to go and see there!

regards,
madhu

Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End– Dr Atul Gawande

GUEST POST by N.R.Ramesh

For those who are not familiar with Atul Gawande, a short introduction is probably in order. He is a surgeon, lives and works in the US at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and has been writing quite extensively. He is a staff writer for the ‘The New Yorker’ magazine, and has published three books earlier, ‘Complications’, ‘Better’ and ‘The Checklist Manifesto’. These books deal with the challenges of practicing medicine, starting from the dilemmas doctors face when they have to treat with incomplete information to running hospitals better and how to make the medical practice safer.

In this book, Dr. Gawande has taken a critical look at how modern society is dealing with the end of life care. He starts by emphasizing that our bodies eventually start failing and the end eventually happens due to the cumulative effects of all the changes due to ageing, starting with cellular degeneration to structural changes to our anatomy. Next he traces a little bit of history of how end of life care has changed from what were called the ‘poor houses’ in the US to the modern day ‘nursing homes’. He also explores the differences between different societies and finds that as the overall economic situation improves, most societies around the globe follow a similar path in terms of dealing with the evening of one’s life.

He vividly describes how the current average nursing home or assisted living communities in the US, and probably in most other developed economies are more designed to be places where one is kept “safe”, and “medically alive” at the cost of everything else that may matter for the resident. He has interviewed several residents, care givers, geriatricians and finds that the routine in such homes are designed for the overall efficiency of the staff and care givers and do not have any flexibility that the residents desire. He highlights this to be one of the first things that people who move into such places miss and makes them feel that they are no longer in their “homes”. The regulations that govern such communities are also only focused on the physical safety of the residents and hardly anything else. Regulations have certainly helped to improve the general hygiene and comfort levels from the days of the “poor houses”, but have not addressed the wholesome needs of the residents. He also gives a good account of hospice care which is getting popular under which one is able to maintain a decent quality of life staying in their own homes.

Dr. Gawande has also interviewed and visited some of the communities that have been trying to fix this issue and have tried to make the residents lives more meaningful. He talks about the community that tried to collocate close to a school with kids visiting them during their breaks or where the residents can watch the kids play, and another one where they tried bringing in pets like birds to keep the residents engaged. It seems that having something meaningful to do, however little it may be due to one’s physical limitations does a world of good to the resident’s mental state and it rubs off into their physical well-being as well.

He then talks about the difficult choices one has to make when faced with terminal illnesses. He illustrates this with a few patients he has followed, primarily those facing terminal cancers and the difficult choices one has to make with respect to the treatment regimens, especially when the outcomes predicted are not very rosy. Quality of life seems to be taking a big hit for some who opt for these treatment regimens and the last few weeks of their life is spent secluded in an Intensive Care Unit, away from their family and friends, and often with multiple tubes into their bodies to keep them “alive”. He suggests that when we know the end is inevitable and fairly close, it may be worth considering what is really important for the individual and allow them to make those choices. He also feels that the medical community, especially Doctors need to be better trained to have these conversations when the person is fully conscious and aware, and help them make the right choices. One of the persons described is his own father who is diagnosed with cancer and how he chose to decline some treatment options towards the end, and decided to stay at home with hospice care.

Overall, a very good book that really takes a critical view of the current state of affairs for those in the evening of their lives, and he has dealt with this subject as candidly as possible. The core message of the book, if I have to sum it up in a single line is that the individual should have a say in how they want to spend their last living days and the medical community and family need to try and make that possible as best as we can.